[rfc-i] Comments on draft-flanagan-nonascii-03

Leonard Rosenthol lrosenth at adobe.com
Wed Oct 29 12:03:41 PDT 2014


I can comment on two that I have authored standards for:

ETSI - the European Telecommunications Standards Institute
(<http://www.etsi.org/>) - requires that all standards be authored in Word
(either .doc or .docx) format which their internal publication staff then
converts to PDF (using some internally developed tools that utilize Adobe
Acrobat) and then publish that PDF.

ISO - International Organization for Standardization
(<http://www.iso.org/>) - historically allowed publications either in Word
(.doc or .docx) or Adobe FrameMaker. However, about 4 years ago they
dropped support for FrameMaker. They then developed a custom XML grammar,
which can also be used for authoring (but no tools are provided).  Word
(.docx) is the preferred format, though they will also accept the XML.
Either one is processed through an internally developed system (based on
Adobe InDesign Server) that takes the Word/XML, relays it out in the
official template and styles and then produces PDF (which it then
publishes).

Let me know if you want/need more info.

Leonard
P.S. I am NOT saying the IETF should follow suit, just answering Joe¹s
question.


On 10/29/14, 2:17 PM, "Joe Touch" <touch at isi.edu> wrote:

>
>
>On 10/29/2014 9:01 AM, Paul Hoffman wrote:
>> If the IETF is the last standards organization to spell peoples' names
>>correctly, that does not look good.
>
>Just curious - how many other standards organization also create their
>own document encoding formats?
>
>Joe
>_______________________________________________
>rfc-interest mailing list
>rfc-interest at rfc-editor.org
>https://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-interest



More information about the rfc-interest mailing list